• We’re currently investigating an issue related to the forum theme and styling that is impacting page layout and visual formatting. The problem has been identified, and we are actively working on a resolution. There is no impact to user data or functionality, this is strictly a front-end display issue. We’ll post an update once the fix has been deployed. Thanks for your patience while we get this sorted.

World of Warcraft test High Quality vs Quality

C

CHfan4ever

Diamond Member
MY system:

AMD Athlon 64 3200.
1 gig of ram kingston 333mhz
geforce 6800gt 256m xfx
Nothing is overclock on my system
using 66.93 drivers.

Is it worth it to set your graphic card at quality? Oh hell yes.For no difference in picture quality, its really worth to set your card to quality over high quality

All test done with 2xQ Anti Aliasing and 4X Aniso Filtering.1280x1024 resolution

High Quality picture frame rate is around 48-50.

Quality picture frame rate is around 64-68

High quality *MODIFIED* i had to turn down the terrain distance by SIXTY-SIX PERCENT in order to have the same frame rate as quality mode.

Will my card remain at quality mode? Oh hell yeah.Im not willing to try beta drivers to see if there is a better performance jump, but you betcha my system will now be set at quality mode.
 
Well, now I'm definitely setting to Quality over HQ. I've always done the other way around, but now, its a done deal. I don't think that I'll notice a difference, but we'll see won't we? I'll check with the 2 games I'm playing most in right now, Star Wars: KOTOR2 and Star Wars: Republic Commando. I'll post my findings (save for screenshots, I have crap-ass dialup 🙁 )
 
For wow and ut2004, iv seen a major difference.For Doom 3 tho i saw a 0.3 difference in the timedemo test.I dont know if there is a similar test in far cry but id love to know to test far cry...

As for half-life 2...i format recently and i dont wanna go over the 5cd + download just to test it lol.....stoopid valve...

im going to try a bit far cry to see if i can notice a difference...without hdr rendering.


I have tried Splinter Cell CT and didnt notice a major difference.
 
Ok by using fraps with far cry, iv done some testing and again, its incredible.

result are with 2xQ aa, 4x af, 1280X768(widescreen)

Iv use fraps and load the same level, and set myself 4 points in the map.Sorry no screenshot this time but here are the result.

QUALITY

Loading Point FPS:100
Halo of Light FPS:44
Mountain look FPS:41
Yellow Barrel FPS:38

HIGH QUALITY

Loading Point FPS:83
Halo of Light: 30
Mountain Look:36( strange higher here than halo compare to quality )
Yellow Barrel:28


i need to do the same test with doom 3, not just the timedemo demo1.demo.


well kinda amazing again lol. 25 % gain aprox...exept when i look at the mountain.

I use the second loading point of the TRAINING map to do these test if your asking
 
One of the reasons why HQ is slower than Q is that it disables all optimizations whereas Quality mode enables 2 optimizations by default. So if you wanna make a real comparison, compare it to Q with optimizations off.
 
Ok for doom 3, i cannot dot he same far cry test lol, engine is lock at 60fps when playing grr...but i done the timedemo test with 2xq aa and 4x af and got some different result.Not as good as far cry/wow.ut2004...but still a bit better

test done with doom 3 in high quality.


1024X768 / 1280X1024
HQ 77.6/77.1 / 68.1/68.9
Q 79.2/79.6 / 72.6/72.4

as you can see, we talk about a 2-3 % increase....for doom, its not worth it.
 
Originally posted by: PrayForDeath
One of the reasons why HQ is slower than Q is that it disables all optimizations whereas Quality mode enables 2 optimizations by default. So if you wanna make a real comparison, compare it to Q with optimizations off.
Click to expand...

Just did that, i got the same number 🙂

 
Well, I just did a quick test with Republic Commando and KOTOR2, and I found that while both games run great on my machine, both slow down a bit in heavy action (as to be expected in high resolutions). I ran the game in spots where there was alot of environmental "candy" as well as some intense fighting. Both games were NOTICEABLY smoother. In highly active scenes, both games ran with nary a hiccup. No slowdown whatsoever! Thats SOOO KOOL! Below is the resolution and settings this test was conducted on, as well as the drivers. The machine details are in my sig.

1280x1024x32 Resolution
KOTOR2 Settings:
---4x AA set in game
---8x AF set in game
Republic Commandos Settings:
---4x AA set in game
---8x AF set in NVIDIA control panel

NVIDIA ForceWare 71.84 drivers (from NZONE)

Again, thanks for the info. This may help me out a bunch! 😀 😀



 
Originally posted by: geforcetony
Well, I just did a quick test with Republic Commando and KOTOR2, and I found that while both games run great on my machine, both slow down a bit in heavy action (as to be expected in high resolutions). I ran the game in spots where there was alot of environmental "candy" as well as some intense fighting. Both games were NOTICEABLY smoother. In highly active scenes, both games ran with nary a hiccup. No slowdown whatsoever! Thats SOOO KOOL! Below is the resolution and settings this test was conducted on, as well as the drivers. The machine details are in my sig.

1280x1024x32 Resolution
KOTOR2 Settings:
---4x AA set in game
---8x AF set in game
Republic Commandos Settings:
---4x AA set in game
---8x AF set in NVIDIA control panel

NVIDIA ForceWare 71.84 drivers (from NZONE)

Again, thanks for the info. This may help me out a bunch! 😀 😀
Click to expand...

NP.Thanks to VIAN in this thread http://forums.anandtech.com/messageview...atid=31&threadid=1535724&enterthread=y to have show me this.

BTW if u need a program to test your FPS in games, get a program call FRAPS. http://www.fraps.com/download.htm with this you can see your fps in games your not able to test, take screenshot and even do video.Very useful tool.

 
You must log in or register to reply here.

TRENDING THREADS

Back
Top